[Hallicrafters] Best RX?

[Robert Nickels]

On 11/27/2010 5:49 PM, Tom Rousseau wrote:
> The SX-111 may look similar to a SX-110, but that's where the similarity ends.
There's one other point that you mention later, Tom, and to me it's a 
key one.  That is the robustness of the tuning capacitor and the geared 
drive, vs. the dial cord and drum drive used on the SX-111.   I grew up 
within one hand on the dial of an SX-110 ;-)  - so I've become 
accustomed to the idiocyncracies of that method, but there's no question 
that it's a "cheap and dirty" alternative, especially once  you've gone 
through the process of meticulously restoring the geartrain from an 
SX-88, SX-28, SX-73 etc.   Hallicrafters engineers clearly knew how to 
design and build great receivers, but as has been mentioned, they were 
typically constrained by the "bang for the buck" Halligan business 
model.   That worked out well for over 30 years, but by the early 60s, 
it had become clear that the massive castings and complex mechanics had 
to go.   Of course the next step was to SSB transceivers, where 
Hallicrafters offered a series of very competitive models and earned a 
decent share of the market.

I turned my SX-111 Mk II on during the course of this thread and was 
instantly reminded that while it's a nice sounding receiver and 
certainly usable,  to me at least much of the "value" of a receiver 
stems from the smoothness of the tuning mechanism, which underscores my 
preference for the 101 over the 111.

73, Bob W9RAN